If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

imported post

If this has already be covered in detail elsewhere, I apologize in advance...I wasn't sure how to phrase it for the search engine.

I was curious as to whether anybody had any insight on whether one could be charged for a concealed handgun in a place where booze is served if the seat you're in happens to position your weapon on the wall side of a booth. I usually prefer to sit that way to cut down on scrutiny (not that my spare mags and surefire on the other side aren't a giveaway), but after reading some VA case law last night, I started to think that I could get in trouble if my weapon isn't to the outside for God and everybody.

imported post

Well, I don't have a cite handy but the general consensus here is that a firearm becoming obstructed from a certain angle of view during normal activities is quite different from actively concealing a firearm.

imported post

marshaul wrote:

Well, I don't have a cite handy but the general consensus here is that a firearm becoming obstructed from a certain angle of view during normal activities is quite different from actively concealing a firearm.

+1 Your seated position does not alter the fact that you are carrying the gun openly.

imported post

If you were to walk down the road someone would not be able to see the weapon if they were on the opposite side of you as your weapon. There is no way to ensure it is always viable unless perhaps you were to have it holstered above your head.

So long as it is not "concealed" on you, or "of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature" then you are fine.

imported post

If you were to walk down the road someone would not be able to see the weapon if they were on the opposite side of you as your weapon. There is no way to ensure it is always viable unless perhaps you were to have it holstered above your head.

So long as it is not "concealed" on you, or "of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature" then you are fine.

-Michael

(emphasis mine)

Welcome to OCDO!!!!!

I hate to "correct" a new guy; but this is really important.

The statute, 18.2-308--linked in the quote, does not discuss '"concealed" on you'. Here is theapplicable text:

A. If any person carries about his person... (emphasis mine)

This does not change the above discussion about "can't always be visible from every angle" and so forth.

Separately, I would like to chip in that how the police officer interprets the statute will be the most important element during a police encounter, especially if he is someone who doesn't like guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens or strongly disagrees with OC.

I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

imported post

firearm becoming obstructed from a certain angle of view during normal activities is quite different from actively concealing a firearm.

+1 Your seated position does not alter the fact that you are carrying the gun openly.

Agreed!!

Think of it this way.
If you take kittens and place them in a oven do they now become biscuits???
No, their still kittens.

No animals were harmed to prove this point.

If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

Citizen wrote:

I would like to chip in that how the police officer interprets the statute will be the most important element during a police encounter, especially if he is someone who doesn't like guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens or strongly disagrees with OC.

SNIP If a police encounter includes the trip to the magistrate's office, I think the magistrate's interpretation of the law is the only one that counts. I have personally stood in our local magistrate's office on more than one occasion and watched ascops were refusedarrest warrants.

This leaves the cop and his agency wide open, but that isn't the magistrate's problem.

Well, yes. If one doesn't mind the trip to the magistrate's.

But, its good to be reminded of the next step in the sequence.

However, are not LEOs in VA required to issue a summons for misdemeanors unless one of several exceptions applies--can't stop the offense, refuses to stop the offense, LEO thinks misdemeanant won't appear, etc?

I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

If a cop is falsely arresting me, I'm not signing anything andI am going to the magistrate's office. If I am 100% sure I am being falsely arrested, I feel sure the magistrate will think so too and cut me free. Then the real fun begins.

I appreciate your fire for thuggish LEOs.

Can we focus on realitiesand likelihoods for a bit? I'd like to weigh things out and see how it would affect tactics.

I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

Citizen wrote:

Can we focus on realitiesand likelihoods for a bit? I'd like to weigh things out and see how it would affect tactics.

Realities and likelihoods? Thread after thread here on the Open Carry forums prove that the reality is people are constantly being falsely arrested for firearms violations all over the nation. The likelihood remains very high that it will continue. I was discussing tactics.... if I am pumping gas into my vehicle and a cop stops and falsely arrests me for openly carrying a firearm in Virginia, I will refuse to sign any summons and let the magistrate explain the legality of open carry in Virginiato the arresting officer. Once the magistrate refuses to issue a criminal warrant and sets me free...... the cop, his superviser and his agencywill be sued. If other officers had stopped and participated in the false arrest at the gas station, they will also be named in the lawsuits.

I'm sorry. I now understand what you meant. Thank you for elaborating.

I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.